^DE GIFT HORACE W. OP KING PEIYADAKSL ^,ll''^J V'A ''iSleY'. Calcutta Translation. M. Burnonf. Proposed Translation. The scriptures of the Munis (the Vedas) are observed by their disci- ples ; their future state is to be dreaded : the texts of the Vedas, in which the sacrifice (of animals) is enjoined are mean and false : obey them not. The stanzas of the Solitary (Buddha), the sntras of the Solitary, the speculations of Upa- tissa, solely the instruc- tion of Rahula, rejecting the false doctrines. (and refuted), the of the Munis, the sutras of the Munis, (the jjrac- tices) of inferior ascetics, the censure of a light world, and (all) false doctrines. Follow that which the lord Buddha hath com- manded : do so for the glorification of the faith. This is what has been said by the blessed Buddha : these topics which the law embraces, I desire, Sirs, and it is the glory to which I am most attached. These things as de- clared by the divine Buddha, I proclaim and I desire them to be re- garded as the precepts of the law. This I desire that all of ye priests and priestesses, religious men and reli- gious women ; yea, every one of you hearing this, bear it in your hearts. This my pleasure I have caused to be writ- ten: yea, I have devised it. That the male and female ascetics may hear and meditate upon them constantly ; as well as the faithful of both sexes. It is for that purpose that I have caused this to be written — such is my pleasure and my declaration. And that as many as there may be, male and female mendicants, may hear and observe them, constantly as well also as male and female followers (of the laity). These things I affirm, and have caused this to be written (to make known to you) that such will be my intention. O'i-vH^Xw -^ '^ /: 368 Art. XXII. — The Chinese on the Plain of Shinar, or a connection established between the Chinese and all other Nations through their Theology. By the Rev. T. M'Clatchi k, M. A,, Missionary to the Chinese from the Church Missionary Society. {Read Fehruarij 16, 1856.] PRKFATORY REMARKS. No one who takes the trouble to investigate the various Mythological systems of the Heathen world, can fail to be struck with the very remarkable similarity which exists between them. To account for this similarity is an interesting, and, at first sight, a difficult under- taking. The Pagan world may be regarded in two points of view, viz. : either before their dispersion at Babel, when the several nations were in embryo and the human race formed one community on'the plain of Shinar; or, after the dispersion, when this commuuity, broken up into various tribes, scattered over the face of the earth, and colonized the various regions of the world. With regard then to the striking similarity which exists between the different systems of Pagan Idolatry, the first question for con- sideration is this — Is the similarity mentioned of such a nature as to be easily and naturally accounted for on the supposition that after the dispersion, and subsequent to their settlement, each nation (including the Chinese) independently oi all the rest, adopted a system of theology which nevertheless coincided in many particulars with all the others 1 There is no doubt that this theory will, to a certain extent, account for the resemblance alluded to. For instance, no one who contem- plates the sun, the dispenser of light and heat, who nourishes the earth with his genial warmth; the moon "walking in brightness ;" and the stars, which with subdued light, wander through infinite ethereal space, can fail to be struck with, and to admire the beauty of these orbs, and the silent majesty with which they glide along their allotted paths : and it would not be very surprising, therefore, if each Pagan nation, being removed from the light of revelation, should have adopted independ^entJy of all the rest, the same worship of the heavenly host. Nor can we regard it as at all impossible that idolatrous nations should also agree with each other, without any previous concert or communication, in worshipping such of their deceased ancestors as had, during their lifetime, secured the rcsi^ect and admiration of their contemporaries, cither by their warlike achievements, or by their nn/y CHINESE THEOLOGY. 369 benevolent actions. We may especially grant tbe probability of tbis when we consider tbat religious worsbip may be, as regards the unenlightened Heathen, a natural consequence of the reverence, blended with affection, with which the memory of such public benefactors as those alluded to, is cherished. '■'■ If such persons," argue the Chinese, as they think, conclusively, '•' be worthy of respect and veneration while living, why should we not continue to exhibit respect and vene- ration towards them when they are dead % Would you trample upon, or show disrespect to, the remains of your deceased parent ? Why then should not we continue to venerate, after death, those who, when alive, commanded by their good deeds the respect and admiration of all mankind ?" In the general worship, therefore, of the heavenly host, and of deceased ancestors, we have an agreement between the various systems of the Pagan world in what may be considered " obvious and natural ;" and there is nothing very remarkable, so far, in the similarity which exists between all the systems of the Heathen. These various system.s, however, do not merely agree in what is " obvious and natural;" but they also agree, in a most singular manner, in what is "arbitrary, and circumstantial, and artificial :" and tkh agreement cannot be accounted for on the hypothesis mentioned. Not to dwell unnecessarily upon this point, it will be sufficient merely to mention two of the many striking agreements alluded to ; e. g. 1. The chief God of every Pagan system, without exception, is. designated "Mind " (Now? or Mens.) 2. This chief God, whose body is the universe, triplicates and also divides into eight portions in each system. Now, it is quite impossible to believe that each Pagan nation, independently of all the rest, not only chose the same designation for their chief God, but also chose the numbers three and eight, without any previous concert or communication whatever. With regard to the Triad and Ogdoad, the case is even stronger than with regard to the remarkable designation "Mind." For, it will be found on investiga- tion, that the universe does not naturally fall into these divisions of three and eight, inasmuch as the details of these numbers vary con- sideraldy in each system ; so that we are driven to the conclusion that the numbers three and eight were fi st chosen, and then the stubborn universe was made, however reluctantly, to bend to them. Hence, as the various theological systems of the Pagan world (including the Chinese) all agree in so remarkable a manner, not merely in what is "obvious and natural," but also in "arbitrary circumstantials," which could not have been the case if each nation 4G27:c 370 CHINESE THEOLOGY. had framed its own system indepciidentl}' of all the rest, and after its final settlement, the inevitable conclusion must be as follows : — " The common arbitrary opinions and observances, which alike prevail in every part of the globe, must have had a common origin^ and each national system, however some minor differences might distinguish it from all other national systems, must have been equally a shoot from a jyi'iineval system so vigorous as to extend its ramifications to all countries of the habitable world." — Faber's Origin of Pag. Idol., vol. i., p. 60. The fact of the common origin of all the Pagan systems being thus established, the next difiiculty is to discover this source of idolatry. Can we suppose that subsequent to the dispersion, and their several settlements, all the other nations adopted the system framed by one 1 Here we are met by two difiiculties ; first, those who adopt this theory difl"er considerably as to what nation formed the model for imitation to the rest. Some say Egypt, some Phenicia, some India, and some Hindostan. All is uncertainty. And even if this point were set at rest, then comes the difficult task of accounting "for the extraordinary circumstance, that all nations upon the face of the earth, whether seated in Europe or Asia, or in Africa, or in America, should have been content to borrow with rare unanimity, the religious system of one single people."^ — Ibid. p. 62. Nor can we adopt the hypothesis, based upon the supposition that the children of Cush and a few followers, were ah)ne concerned in the apostasy of Babel, that all nations, after their settlement, were con- quered by this roving tribe, and were compelled to adopt its idolatrous system. It is not easy to admit that "a single tribe, and that too broken into small fragments by an eminent display of divine vengeance* could manage to subdue and convert all the rest of mankind, who had previously retired in a prosperous and orderly manner to their appointed settlements." — Ibid. p. 03. We are therefore obliged to adopt the third and only remaining hypothesis, viz. : that " all nations while yet in embryo, and during these ages of the infancy of society which immediately followed the deluge were assembled together in one community, previous to their separation and dispersion over the face of the earth, and in that state of primitive union agreed in the adoption of a system, which when afterwards broken into tribes the germs of future nations tliey equally carried with them into whatever region they might at any subsequent time be induced to colonize." — Ibid. p. 61. This last proposition Mr. Fabcr, in his learned and interesting CHINESE THEOLOGY. 371 work, shows to be in accordance with the scriptural history of Nimrod and the tower of Babel, and also with profane history. Alluding to the founding of the universal empire under Nimrod, that learned author observes: — " In the short account which Moses gives of this early transaction, no direct mention is made of any attempt to introduce a new system of religion ; though something of the kind seems to be hinted at in the assertion that nothing could restrain the roving imagination of this rebellious community ; but the Jews have ever supposed that idolatry commenced at Babel ; whence they have a story that Abraham was cast into a furnace by Nimrod for refusing to worship the sacred fire which was the symbol of the solar deity. We have, however, far better authority than Jewish tradition, though I see no reason why we should slight it as altogether nugatory, for asserting that the first systematic apostasy from pure religion was consummated at Babel, and that from that centre it spread itself over the whole world. The prophet of the Apocalypse styles Babylon or Babel the vxolher of harlots and ahominations of the earth ; by which it need scarcely be observed is meant, in the figurative language of scri])ture, that all the abominations of apostate idolatry originated from that city as from a common parent/' &c. " Thus so far as I can judge, it indisputably appears that the idolatry by which ail the nations of the earth were infatuated, was a system originally invented at Babel under the auspices of Nimrod and his Cuthites, and afterwards in progress of replenishing the world with inhabitants by the various scattered members of his broken empire, carried off alike to the nearest, and to the most remote countries of the globe." &c. — Ibid. pp. 77-8. Having thus briefly stated Mr. Faber's argument, I now proceed to the inquiry which forms the subject of the following pages. The question I propose is this — Were the ancestors of the Chinese to be found amongst the ancient community who engaged in building the tower of Babel on the plain of Shinar, or not ? In order to establish an affirmative answer to this inquiry, it will be necessary to investigate Chinese theology, and there to search for any traces which may exist of the one general primeval system of idolatry established previous to the building of Babel. If we find that the Chinese have also traces of this one system, and that they agree with all other nations not only in the adoption of what is " obvious and natural," but also in "arbitrary circumstantials," while they diff'er from them as to detail, then the conclusion is inevitable that this nation also has derived its theology from the one source common to all, and was therefore represented in 372 CHINESE THEOLOGY. the siiii^le community which existed subsequent to the tleluge, and the members of which agreed to adopt that one system which was afterwards carried by them, when broken into tribes, into the several nations wliich they founded. Thus we shall be able to establish a remarkable connection between the Chinese and all other heathen nations through their theology and to show that they do not in reality occupy so isolated a position among the nations of the earth as has been hitherto so generally assigned them. The principal points which I shall endeavour to establish are — 1. That as all other Pagan nations, however they may worship multi- tudes of divinities, yet hold the existence of one God, kut c^oxnv, the First Cause of all things, so also d.) the Chinese recognise this First Cause, and assign to him precisely the same titles and attributes as those given to him by the rest of the Pagan world ; 2. That those portions of the animated world, kc, which all other nations have designated " God," the Chinese also so designate ; and 3. That the chief object of idolatrous worship in China, viz. Shnng-te, is a deified man, and is the same Being designated by Mr. Faber the " Great Father" of the Pagan world, who is Adam or Noah, and is designated by the several nations who worship him Baal, Jupiter, Osiris, Brahm, &c., or Now*, Mens, Menu, Man, kc. The Triad and Ogdoad, two of "those "arbitrary circumstantials" which, together with variety of^ detail, prove that the several heathen nations have derived their theology, not from any single nation, but from one source common to all, are also to be found in the Chinese system. It may be necessary to observe here, that the two polytheistic systems found in all Pagan nations, viz. that which admits of visible representations of the Gods, and that which is designated the material system (and which are in reality but one and the same system) are both found in China. The Confucianists, like all other materialists, reject the absurdities of the grosser polytheistic sects, and make their deities souls or portions of the animated material world, which is regarded by this sect as the greatest Numen, and as a divine animal endowed with life. It is this latter system, being that inculcated in the Chinese Classics, which the following pages are intended to elucidate. I. GOU, vr/-' r^'oX'/"- 1. The charge brought by the Apostle again.'^t the heathen world is, that they " worshii)ped and served the ocaiure, more than the Creator." This was a consequence of their mode of reasoning; for, instead of arguing from creation to the existence of a God of all CHINESE THEOLOGY. 373 power and miglit, they subjected the Crecator himself to those laws by which his creation is governed. This constituted their fundamental error, from which all their misconcejitions sprang. As they saw that the mechanic, for instance, could not produce any work of art, without some material to work upon, they rashly concluded that God was such an one as themselves in this respect, and that therefore He could not make the world without some previously existing material out of which to form it, and hence all the Pagan philosophers without exception held that God made the world out of pre-existing, eternal matter. " All philosophers," says Gassendi, " agree in the pre-existeuce of the matter of which the universe is composed, because nothing can be produced from nothing ; whereas, however, scripture truth declares that the universe was created out of nothing and from no material."— Cud worth's Intellec. Syst. vol. iii., p. 144. These philosophers, however, may be divided into two classes. In the Jird class may be ranked those who, like Plato and others, while they associated God and eternal matter, and supposed a certain connection between those two, yet did not make the former wholly dependent upon the latter ; and in the second class may be included those who, like the Stoics, inseparably united the two, and held that the one could not exist separate from the other. 2. The Chinese philosophers, like Anaximenes and others, conside the material origin of all things to be K'e or Air, which is the primary matter from which all things are formed.— (See Morrison's Dictionary, part ii., vol. i.. No. 531 1.) This K'e, or Matter, is considered by them to be eternal, and it is associated with an eternal, ungenerated, and therefore self-existent First Cause, which the Confucianists generally style Le or Fate (see Ibid. No. 6942). And as the other Pagans have designated this Eternal Fate " God," and declared him to be " Incomprehensible," so also the Chinese philosophers designate him " God," and predicate of him the same attribute of incomprehensibility ; e. g. :— " Le is God (Shin) and is Incom'prehendUe." — Sing-le-ta-tseuen, eh. ii., p. 36. " Being asked whether the God (Suin) spoken of is the Maker and Transformer of heaven and earth, he (Choo-tsze) replied God (Shin) is just that Le," &c.— Ibid. p. 35. " They (the Chinese) often say Le is God (Shin)."— Morrison's Memoirs of Dr. Milne, p. IGl. As the Pagans considered all things to depend upon their God, Kuj e^ox'ji', for existence, so do the Chinese philosophers ; e. g. :— VOL. XVI. 2 C 374 CHINESE THEOLOGY. " If this Le liad no existence, then, there ivould he no heaven, nor earth, nor vien, nor thm